I live in a land called Mid-America. Here, we want less government involvement in our lives. And we're mostly non-elite, working middle-class. "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." Thomas Jefferson

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Global Warming. Global Cooling. Whatever!

The charts are misleading, because the top chart is over more than 200 years, while the bottom chart is over only about 10, but look at the top right corner of the top graph: it drops, and appears to stay flat for the rest of the chart. The bottom graph is a magnification of just that section, and shows how flat temperatures have been for the last ten years (and a substantial dip right at the end — this could be a cold winter, folks.)

Of course, the problem with that is that the CO2-forced anthropogenic global warming models all say temperatures should be increasing steadily, not taking 10-15 years off. Now, not that this isn’t a disproof: there are other possibile explanations, but it is evidence against the simple models that ought to be explained, not hidden.

Actually, the average temperature over the last 50 years has increased 1.6 degrees. If it continues, that is about 3 degrees per century, not the 10-15 degrees claimed by many. Go back 1000 years. The planet was warmer than it is today. Go back 85 million years. It was a lot warmer than today. Explanation? There are only hypothesis, not proof.

For those of you who think the debate on global warming (climate change) is over, as per Mr. Gore, you need to realize that when scientific debate is closed, it becomes more like a religion than scientific investigation.

The climate has always been changing. Most likely always will, but I -- and you -- can't prove a thing.

And that's probably my first and last post on this subject.

2 comments:

This flip-flopping, along with blind ignorance of factors such as solar activity's impact on global temperatures has always frustrated me. Some scientists predicted cooler temperatures based on solar activity but most of what I saw in the media was claims that it was further proof we were "killing the planet" and of global warming which they rebranded as "climate change". Even if they accept that the recent lack of warming is a result of said activity they will not even consider that it could work the other way around.

Personally I think the Greens are ultimately harmful to humankind and the environment. While fixating on carbon, we are distracted from actual harm caused by genuine pollutants and their dogmatism leads to tragedies like malarial deaths due to indiscriminate and broad bans on pesticides, stops the development of the very promising and safe liquid fluoride thorium reactor nuclear technology and even the building of the solar panels they love so much by blocking the access to the necessary raw materials.

One thing that is undeniable is that for the vast majority of the earth's geological history it has not been hospitable to humankind without any industrial activity at all. They cling to this certainty that we are the cause and it is catastrophic even though the dire prediction vary wildly in degree. None seem to be willing to even entertain that perhaps we are getting warmer due to things that have little to do with us and catastrophic or not, we may not be able affect it at all. Emotions are not a good starting place for science and if we are to look at this issue critically we need more data, not alarmism.

When I look at those who are so eager to push this as truth rather than something to look at with a truly critical eye and further research, all I seem to see is "news" and the like trying to make money of the alarmism, scientists scared to lose their grants because the global warming meme is rife in those who fund them and mostly the politically motivated such as ol' Saint Al, whose influence and wealth has grown immensely on this issue.